Selected Acquisition Report (SAR) · 2017. 5. 19. · As of December 31, 2012 ... Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) data collection and dissemination as well as an airborne communications

Selected Acquisition Report (SAR)

RCS: DD-A&T(Q&A)823-373

MQ-4C Triton Unmanned Aircraft System (MQ-4C Triton)As of December 31, 2012

Defense Acquisition Management Information Retrieval

(DAMIR)

May 21, 2013 16:24:38 UNCLASSIFIED

MQ-4C Triton December 31, 2012 SAR

May 21, 2013 16:24:38 UNCLASSIFIED 2

Table of Contents

Program Information 3Responsible Office 3References 3Mission and Description 4Executive Summary 5Threshold Breaches 6Schedule 7Performance 9Track To Budget 11Cost and Funding 13Low Rate Initial Production 22Foreign Military Sales 23Nuclear Cost 23Unit Cost 24Cost Variance 27Contracts 30Deliveries and Expenditures 31Operating and Support Cost 32

Program Information

Responsible Office

References

Program Name MQ-4C Triton Unmanned Aircraft System (MQ-4C Triton)

DoD Component Navy

Responsible OfficeCAPT James Hoke 47561 Ranch Road Bldg 4023 Naval Air Station Patuxent River, MD 20670

Phone Fax DSN Phone DSN Fax

301-757-5832 301-757-9459 757-5832 757-9459

[email protected] Date Assigned June 24, 2011

SAR Baseline (Development Estimate)Defense Acquisition Executive (DAE) Approved Acquisition Program Baseline (APB) dated February 7, 2009 Approved APBDefense Acquisition Executive (DAE) Approved Acquisition Program Baseline (APB) dated January 19, 2012



Mission and Description The MQ-4C Triton is an integrated System of Systems and a force multiplier for the Joint Force and Fleet Commander, enhancing battlespace awareness and shortening the sensor-to-shooter kill chain. The system provides multiple-sensor, persistent maritime and littoral Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) data collection and dissemination as well as an airborne communications relay capability to Combatant Commanders, Expeditionary Strike Group Commanders, Carrier Strike Group Commanders, and other designated U.S. and Joint Commanders. The addition of a de-icing capability over the baseline Global Hawk provides operators with the capability to transition through icing conditions. The mission sensors installed on Triton provide 360 degree radar and Electro-Optical/Infrared coverage. Additional functionality that optimizes the system for maritime search operations includes an Automatic Identification System and an Electronic Support Measures with Specific Emitter Identification. Triton is a tactical, land-based, forward deployed platform that will operate from five operational sites (orbits) worldwide. It will provide surveillance when no other naval forces are present and will support operations in the littorals. Furthermore, the asset will respond to Theater level operational or National strategic taskings.



Executive Summary The MQ-4C Triton Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) is an Acquisition Category (ACAT) ID program that entered System Development and Demonstration (SDD) based on a Milestone (MS) B Acquisition Decision Memorandum (ADM) issued on April 18, 2008. The program conducted a successful System Requirements Review in January 2009, System Functional Review in June 2009, Integrated Baseline Review in July 2009, Preliminary Design Review in February 2010, Critical Design Review in February 2011, and Flight Readiness Review in March 2013. The MQ-4C Triton program also continues to pursue opportunities for joint efficiencies with the Air Force Global Hawk program.

Triton received approval from the Milestone Decision Authority to award the Cost Plus Award Fee option to the SDD contract for the System Demonstration Test Article (SDTA) lot of aircraft and associated ground stations. The November 1, 2011 ADM directed the Navy to rename this lot of aircraft from Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) Lot 1 to SDTAs in keeping with their intended purpose, to finish system developmental test and to support Operational Evaluation (OPEVAL). Subsequent production lots have been renamed accordingly.

During this reporting period, the MQ-4C Triton UAS program entered integrated testing with receipt of the first SDD aircraft in June 2012. Formal ground and lab test events were conducted in preparation for first flight, with a successful low speed taxi conducted in December 2012. Multiple surrogate risk reduction flights were completed during this year on a Gulfstream testbed for the Multi Function Active Sensor radar. Assembly of the first SDTA aircraft began in November 2012. This SAR reports that the MQ-4C Triton UAS program will breach the Acquisition Program Baseline cost threshold for Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) and the schedule thresholds for Milestone C, OPEVAL start, Full Rate Production, and Initial Operational Capability. These breaches are based on delays due to technical challenges associated with system integration and developmental testing, which delayed entry into flight test. These delays aligned with Navy initiatives to reprioritize the program's production funding in FY 2014. This SAR documents only the program of record for baseline Intelligence Surveillance, and Reconnaissance capability; budget and expected development costs for planned Signals Intelligence capability are omitted pending requirements refinement and structuring of an integration effort. While corrections to software during integration of subsystems are the primary reasons for a delay in the program's operational assessment and production decision, fixes have been implemented. There are no significant software-related issues with this program at this time.



Threshold Breaches

APB Breaches Schedule Performance Cost RDT&E

Procurement MILCON Acq O&M

O&S CostUnit Cost PAUC

APUC Nunn-McCurdy Breaches

Current UCR Baseline PAUC NoneAPUC None

Original UCR Baseline PAUC NoneAPUC None

Explanation of Breach The MQ-4C Triton UAS program will breach the Acquisition Program Baseline (APB) cost threshold for Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) and the schedule thresholds for Milestone (MS) C, Operational Evaluation (OPEVAL) start, Full Rate Production (FRP), and Initial Operational Capability (IOC). These cost and schedule breaches are based on delays due to technical challenges associated with system integration and developmental testing, which delayed entry into flight test. These delays aligned with Navy initiatives to reprioritize the program's production funding in the FY 2014 President's Budget. A Program Deviation Report has been submitted and a proposed APB revision is in development. The current estimate for the MS C schedule parameter reflects the impact of delayed entry into production. Current estimates for the subsequent OPEVAL start, FRP, and IOC parameters have been aligned with the planned production and delivery schedule to support first orbit standup. The RDT&E breach is based on cost growth due to technical challenges associated with system integration and developmental testing, which delayed entry into flight test.



Schedule

Milestones SAR Baseline Dev Est

Current APB Development

Objective/Threshold

Current Estimate

Milestone B APR 2008 APR 2008 APR 2008 APR 2008System Requirements Review (SRR) JAN 2009 JAN 2009 JUL 2009 JAN 2009Preliminary Design Review (PDR) JAN 2010 JAN 2010 JUL 2010 FEB 2010Critical Design Review (CDR) JAN 2011 JAN 2011 JUL 2011 FEB 2011Milestone C MAY 2013 MAY 2013 NOV 2013 NOV 2014 1 (Ch-1)

Operational Evaluation (OPEVAL) Start JAN 2015 JAN 2015 JUL 2015 JAN 2016 1 (Ch-2)

Full Rate Production (FRP) DEC 2015 DEC 2015 JUN 2016 DEC 2016 1 (Ch-3)

Initial Operational Capability (IOC) DEC 2015 DEC 2015 JUN 2016 MAY 2017 1 (Ch-4)1APB Breach



Change Explanations (Ch-1) Milestone (MS) C current estimate has been delayed 16 months from July 2013 to November 2014 due to delayed entry into flight test, and to align with planned entry into production. (Ch-2) Operational Evaluation (OPEVAL) current estimate has been delayed 12 months from January 2015 to January 2016 to accomodate the full scope of the test program following delayed entry into flight test. (Ch-3) Full Rate Production (FRP) current estimate has been delayed 12 months from December 2015 to December 2016 due to delayed entry into Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) as part of FY 2014 President's Budget (PB), which delays the need for an FRP review as part of the orderly production flow. (Ch-4) Initial Operational Capability (IOC) current estimate has been delayed 17 months from December 2015 to May 2017 due to delayed entry into LRIP as part of FY 2014 PB, which delays delivery of production units required to complete first orbit standup.



Performance

Requirements Source: Capability Development Document (CDD) dated May 21, 2007

CharacteristicsSAR Baseline

Dev Est


Objective/Threshold

Demonstrated Performance

Current Estimate

Persistent multi-sensor maritime ISR at mission radius

On station 24 hrs a day / 7 days a week for 30 consecutive days with an ETOS of >=95%

On station 24 hrs a day / 7 days a week for 30 consecutive days with an ETOS of >=95%

On station 24 hrs a day for 7 consecutive days with ETOS of >=80%

TBD On station 24 hrs a day / 7 days a week for 7 consecutive days with an ETOS of >=88% at a mission radius of 2,000 nm

(Ch-1)

Level of Interoperability 1-5

BLOS and LOS from MOB/ FOB (Land Based) MCS

BLOS and LOS from MOB/ FOB (Land Based) MCS

BLOS and LOS from the MOB (Land Based) MCS

TBD BLOS and LOS from MOB (Land Based) MCS

UA Mission Radius >=3,000 nm >=3,000 nm >=2,000 nm TBD >=2,000 nmLevel Of Interoperability 2 Capability

LOS/BLOS multi-ISR payload reception to Maritime Forces

LOS/BLOS multi-ISR payload reception to Maritime Forces

LOS, ISR payload sensor data reception to Maritime Forces afloat (CVN, LHA/LHD)

TBD LOS, ISR payload sensor data reception to Maritime Forces afloat (CVN, LHA/LHD)

Net Ready IAW CJCSI 6212.01D

IAW CJCSI 6212.01D

IAW CJCSI 6212.01D

TBD IAW CJCSI 6212.01D

Operational Availability >=0.9 >=0.9 >=0.7 at IOT&E >=0.8 at IOC plus two years

TBD >=0.86



Classified Performance information is provided in the classified annex to this submission.

Acronyms And Abbreviations BLOS - Beyond Line of Sight CJCSI - Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction CVN - Aircraft Carrier Nuclear ETOS - Effective Time On Station FOB - Forward Operating Base hrs - hours IAW - In Accordance With IOC - Initial Operational Capability IOT&E - Initial Operational Test & Evaluation ISR - Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance LHA - Amphibious Assault Ship (General Purpose) LHD - Amphibious Assault Ship (Multi Purpose) LOS - Line of Sight MCS - Mission Control System MOB - Main Operating Base nm - nautical miles TBD - To Be Determined UA - Unmanned Aircraft

Change Explanations (Ch-1) Persistent multi-sensor maritime Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) at mission radius Key Performance Parameter Effective Time On Station (ETOS) adjustment from 87% to 88% due to reduced aircraft weight.



Track To Budget RDT&E APPN 1319 BA 07 PE 0305205N (Navy) Project 4020 BAMS UAS (Shared) (Sunk) APPN 1319 BA 07 PE 0305220N (Navy) Project 4020 BAMS UAS (Shared) Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) funding for MQ-4C Triton Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) capability is included in the FY 2014 President's Budget ($32.1M in FY 2015, $109.7M in FY 2016, $117.0M in FY 2017, and $124.3M in FY 2018), and the Department is examining acquisition alternatives to integrate and field this capability. Funding associated with SIGINT capability is not reported in this submission. Procurement APPN 1506 BA 04 PE 0305220N (Navy) ICN 0442 BAMS UAS APPN 1506 BA 06 PE 0305220N (Navy) ICN 0605 BAMS UAS (Shared) MILCON APPN 1205 BA 01 PE 0203176N (Navy) Project 00207655 BAMS Mission Control Complex (Shared) APPN 1205 BA 01 PE 0212176N (Navy) Project 00207662 BAMS Mission Control System (Shared)

Project 62995407 BAMS Aircraft and Maintenance Hangar

(Shared)

Project 69232593 BAMS Consolidated Maintenance Hangar

(Shared)

Project 69232594 BAMS Aircraft and Maintenance Hangar

(Shared)

Project C1002960 BAMS Operational Facilities (Shared)



APPN 1205 BA 01 PE 0815976N (Navy)

Project 00207153 BAMS UAS Operator Training Facility

(Shared) (Sunk)

Project 41557625 BAMS Forward Operational and Maintenance Hangar

(Shared)

Project 63042900 BAMS Maintenance Training Facility

(Shared)

Project C1002154 BAMS UAS Operator Training Facility

(Shared)

APPN 1205 BA 01 PE 0816376N (Navy)

Project 0428A263 BAMS Test and Evaluation Facility

(Shared) (Sunk)



Cost and Funding Cost Summary

Total Acquisition Cost and Quantity

BY2008 $M BY2008 $M TY $M

AppropriationSAR Baseline

Dev Est


Objective/Threshold

Current Estimate

SAR Baseline Dev Est


Objective

Current Estimate

RDT&E 2989.3 2989.3 3288.2 3292.21

3223.6 3223.6 3557.0

Procurement 8871.2 8871.2 9758.3 8678.5 11525.6 11525.6 11382.2

Flyaway 5497.9 -- -- 5620.7 7124.5 -- 7342.2

Recurring 5316.4 -- -- 5362.6 6908.0 -- 7011.9

Non Recurring 181.5 -- -- 258.1 216.5 -- 330.3

Support 3373.3 -- -- 3057.8 4401.1 -- 4040.0

Other Support 2328.4 -- -- 2119.9 3023.9 -- 2806.5

Initial Spares 1044.9 -- -- 937.9 1377.2 -- 1233.5

MILCON 364.0 364.0 400.4 282.7 423.1 423.1 329.0

Acq O&M 0.0 0.0 -- 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total 12224.5 12224.5 N/A 12253.4 15172.3 15172.3 15268.2 1 APB Breach

Quantity SAR Baseline Dev Est


Current Estimate

RDT&E 5 5 5Procurement 65 65 65Total 70 70 70

The Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) total quantity of five is comprised of two engineering development models and three System Demonstration Test Article (SDTA) Unmanned Aircraft (UA).



Cost and Funding Funding Summary

Appropriation and Quantity Summary FY2014 President's Budget / December 2012 SAR (TY$ M)

Program funding and production quantities listed in this SAR are consistent with the FY 2014 President's Budget (PB). The FY 2014 PB did not reflect the enacted DoD appropriation for FY 2013, nor sequestration; it reflected the President's requested amounts for FY 2013.

Appropriation Prior FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 FY2017 FY2018 To Complete

Total

RDT&E 2101.2 657.5 375.2 304.7 96.6 21.8 0.0 0.0 3557.0

Procurement 0.0 51.1 52.0 685.1 649.8 609.0 833.9 8501.3 11382.2

MILCON 37.5 70.9 79.2 74.1 31.5 35.8 0.0 0.0 329.0

Acq O&M 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

PB 2014 Total 2138.7 779.5 506.4 1063.9 777.9 666.6 833.9 8501.3 15268.2

PB 2013 Total 2138.4 779.5 840.7 854.8 788.7 747.1 1031.5 7701.6 14882.3

Delta 0.3 0.0 -334.3 209.1 -10.8 -80.5 -197.6 799.7 385.9

Quantity Undistributed Prior FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 FY2017 FY2018 To Complete

Total

Development 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5Production 0 0 0 0 3 4 4 6 48 65PB 2014 Total 5 0 0 0 3 4 4 6 48 70PB 2013 Total 5 0 0 3 4 4 5 5 44 70Delta 0 0 0 -3 -1 0 -1 1 4 0



Cost and Funding Annual Funding By Appropriation

Annual Funding TY$ 1319 | RDT&E | Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy

Fiscal Year Quantity

End Item Recurring Flyaway

TY $M

Non End Item

Recurring Flyaway

TY $M

Non Recurring Flyaway TY $M

Total Flyaway TY $M

Total Support TY $M

Total Program

TY $M

2004 -- -- -- -- -- -- 19.8

2005 -- -- -- -- -- -- 39.3

2006 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

2007 -- -- -- -- -- -- 26.2

2008 -- -- -- -- -- -- 83.1

2009 -- -- -- -- -- -- 420.4

2010 -- -- -- -- -- -- 438.2

2011 -- -- -- -- -- -- 525.6

2012 -- -- -- -- -- -- 548.6

2013 -- -- -- -- -- -- 657.5

2014 -- -- -- -- -- -- 375.2

2015 -- -- -- -- -- -- 304.7

2016 -- -- -- -- -- -- 96.6

2017 -- -- -- -- -- -- 21.8

Subtotal 5 -- -- -- -- -- 3557.0



Annual Funding BY$ 1319 | RDT&E | Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy



BY 2008 $M

Non End Item

Recurring Flyaway

BY 2008 $M

Non Recurring Flyaway

BY 2008 $M

Total Flyaway

BY 2008 $M

Total Support

BY 2008 $M

Total Program

BY 2008 $M

2004 -- -- -- -- -- -- 21.6

2005 -- -- -- -- -- -- 41.8

2006 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

2007 -- -- -- -- -- -- 26.4

2008 -- -- -- -- -- -- 82.2

2009 -- -- -- -- -- -- 410.7

2010 -- -- -- -- -- -- 421.7

2011 -- -- -- -- -- -- 492.9

2012 -- -- -- -- -- -- 504.5

2013 -- -- -- -- -- -- 593.1

2014 -- -- -- -- -- -- 332.1

2015 -- -- -- -- -- -- 264.7

2016 -- -- -- -- -- -- 82.3

2017 -- -- -- -- -- -- 18.2

Subtotal 5 -- -- -- -- -- 3292.2



Annual Funding TY$ 1506 | Procurement | Aircraft Procurement, Navy



TY $M

Non End Item

Recurring Flyaway

TY $M

Non Recurring Flyaway TY $M

Total Flyaway TY $M

Total Support TY $M

Total Program

TY $M

2013 -- 51.1 -- -- 51.1 -- 51.1

2014 -- 52.0 -- -- 52.0 -- 52.0

2015 3 368.6 -- 42.2 410.8 274.3 685.1

2016 4 418.1 -- 42.2 460.3 189.5 649.8

2017 4 425.6 -- 37.7 463.3 145.7 609.0

2018 6 587.0 -- 37.2 624.2 209.7 833.9

2019 6 628.2 -- 81.0 709.2 448.9 1158.1

2020 6 601.1 -- -- 601.1 336.1 937.2

2021 6 613.2 -- -- 613.2 343.8 957.0

2022 6 646.1 -- -- 646.1 370.9 1017.0

2023 6 639.6 -- -- 639.6 340.1 979.7

2024 5 549.8 -- -- 549.8 327.0 876.8

2025 5 599.2 -- -- 599.2 353.6 952.8

2026 5 533.1 -- -- 533.1 361.4 894.5

2027 3 299.2 -- 90.0 389.2 339.0 728.2

Subtotal 65 7011.9 -- 330.3 7342.2 4040.0 11382.2



Procurement funding in FY 2013 ($51.1M TY/$45.3M BY) was Advance Procurement for 3 Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) aircraft in FY 2014. In the FY 2014 President's Budget (PB), production was shifted to FY 2015 and System Development and Demonstration (SDD) efforts were extended. The program plans to request reprogramming of FY 2013 Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN) funding to support MQ-4C Triton development execution.

Annual Funding BY$ 1506 | Procurement | Aircraft Procurement, Navy



BY 2008 $M

Non End Item

Recurring Flyaway

BY 2008 $M

Non Recurring Flyaway

BY 2008 $M

Total Flyaway

BY 2008 $M

Total Support

BY 2008 $M

Total Program

BY 2008 $M

2013 -- 45.3 -- -- 45.3 -- 45.3

2014 -- 45.3 -- -- 45.3 -- 45.3

2015 3 314.9 -- 36.1 351.0 234.4 585.4

2016 4 350.6 -- 35.4 386.0 158.8 544.8

2017 4 350.2 -- 31.0 381.2 119.9 501.1

2018 6 474.0 -- 30.0 504.0 169.4 673.4

2019 6 497.8 -- 64.2 562.0 355.7 917.7

2020 6 467.5 -- -- 467.5 261.3 728.8

2021 6 468.0 -- -- 468.0 262.4 730.4

2022 6 483.9 -- -- 483.9 277.8 761.7

2023 6 470.1 -- -- 470.1 250.0 720.1

2024 5 396.6 -- -- 396.6 235.8 632.4

2025 5 424.1 -- -- 424.1 250.3 674.4

2026 5 370.3 -- -- 370.3 251.0 621.3

2027 3 204.0 -- 61.4 265.4 231.0 496.4

Subtotal 65 5362.6 -- 258.1 5620.7 3057.8 8678.5



Cost Quantity Information 1506 | Procurement | Aircraft Procurement, Navy

Fiscal Year

Quantity

End Item Recurring Flyaway (Aligned

with Quantity) BY 2008

$M

2013 -- --

2014 -- --

2015 3 298.3

2016 4 349.5

2017 4 318.6

2018 6 472.4

2019 6 496.2

2020 6 465.9

2021 6 466.4

2022 6 497.4

2023 6 468.7

2024 5 395.2

2025 5 422.8

2026 5 399.2

2027 3 312.0

Subtotal 65 5362.6



Annual Funding TY$ 1205 | MILCON | Military Construction, Navy and Marine Corps

Fiscal Year

Total Program

TY $M

2011 33.0

2012 4.5

2013 70.9

2014 79.2

2015 74.1

2016 31.5

2017 35.8

Subtotal 329.0



Military Construction (MILCON) costs are for seven sites: Patuxent River, Maryland (Test & Evaluation) in FY 2011; Jacksonville, Florida in FY 2012, FY 2013 and FY 2015; Central Command in FY 2013; Ventura County, California in FY 2013, FY 2014 and FY 2016; Guam in FY 2014; Whidbey Island, Washington in FY 2016; and Sigonella, Italy in FY 2015. Changes since last year reflect improved accuracy in estimates based on increased understanding of specific site requirements, and Navy adjustments to account for US Air Force plans to divest of the Global Hawk Block 30 and cease operations at Beale Air Force Base, California. The shift from Beale Air Force Base to Navy facilities at Ventura County reduced Triton's total estimated MILCON requirement.

Annual Funding BY$ 1205 | MILCON | Military Construction, Navy and Marine Corps

Fiscal Year

Total Program

BY 2008 $M

2011 30.1

2012 4.0

2013 62.3

2014 68.3

2015 62.7

2016 26.1

2017 29.2

Subtotal 282.7



Low Rate Initial Production

The Current Total LRIP Quantity is more than 10% of the total production quantity due to the establishment of an initial production base for the system and an orderly and efficient increase in the production rate. The April 18, 2008 Milestone (MS) B Acquisition Decision Memorandum (ADM) approved the planning for the program's MS C LRIP decision and stipulated the quantity will not exceed 10 unmanned aircraft systems and related ground control systems. A subsequent ADM directed redesignation of the first lot of aircraft from LRIP Lot 1 to System Demonstration Test Articles (SDTAs), with LRIP Lot 1 to follow. The SDTA aircraft will validate critical Key Performance Parameters (KPPs) in developmental test and serve as the test articles for Operational Evaluation (OPEVAL). These aircraft will receive hardware and software updates as required to make them production representative and will be transferred for operational use at the conclusion of OPEVAL. The result of redesignating this lot of aircraft is a net reduction in the quantity produced as LRIP. The program is authorized to procure ten LRIP aircraft but currently plans to procure seven aircraft before proceeding to a Full Rate Production decision. The total number of vehicles delivered for operational use over the life of the program, and the funding source for each lot of aircraft, are unaffected by this decision. The program plans to request reprogramming of FY 2013 Aircraft Procurement, Navy funding to support MQ-4C Triton development execution. FY 2014 President's Budget (PB) delays entry into production by one year, with no change to the quantity of aircraft to be produced under LRIP.

Initial LRIP Decision Current Total LRIP Approval Date 4/18/2008 11/1/2011 Approved Quantity 10 10 Reference Milestone B ADM ADM Start Year 2013 2013 End Year 2015 2016



Nuclear Cost

Foreign Military Sales

The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (OUSD) Acquisition, Technology & Logistics (AT&L) selected the MQ-4C Triton to participate in Phase-I of the Defense Exportability Features (DEF) pilot program to assess the feasibility of incorporating technology protection measures to enhance the exportability of the MQ-4C Triton. Efforts began in 2012 and will continue through 2013. The goal of the DEF program is to define export configurations for the MQ-4C Triton. This will ultimately increase interoperability with our allies while reducing the unit cost to the United States Government (USG). Actual implementation of the features will be covered under Phase II of the DEF program.

Over the years, the Commonwealth of Australia (CoA) has maintained interest in the MQ-4C Triton as a top solution to meet their need for a Multi-mission Unmanned Aircraft System (MUAS). The CoA participated in a cooperative program with the USG for the pre-System Development and Demonstration (SDD) phase of the MQ-4C Triton program. However in 2008, they decided not to continue as a cooperative partner for SDD phase citing competing priorities with the P-8A Poseidon and limited resources to integrate the P-8A Poseidon and MQ-4C Triton into their fleet nearly simultaneously. In spite of this, the CoA has maintained interest in the MQ-4C Triton program, and plans to implement an FMS Planning case in 2013. The FMS Planning case will provide technical information and services to validate that the MQ-4C Triton UAS will meet their specific MUAS requirements and help transition the CoA to an FMS procurement case.

In October 2012, the Navy briefed and received approval (with provisos) to offer a technical services planning case to the CoA.

Other interested foreign governments include Canada, Japan, Germany, Norway and the United Kingdom.

None



Unit Cost Unit Cost Report

BY2008 $M BY2008 $M

Unit Cost Current UCR

Baseline (JAN 2012 APB)

Current Estimate (DEC 2012 SAR)

BY % Change

Program Acquisition Unit Cost (PAUC) Cost 12224.5 12253.4Quantity 70 70Unit Cost 174.636 175.049 +0.24

Average Procurement Unit Cost (APUC) Cost 8871.2 8678.5Quantity 65 65Unit Cost 136.480 133.515 -2.17

BY2008 $M BY2008 $M

Unit Cost Original UCR

Baseline (FEB 2009 APB)

Current Estimate (DEC 2012 SAR)

BY % Change

Program Acquisition Unit Cost (PAUC) Cost 12224.5 12253.4Quantity 70 70Unit Cost 174.636 175.049 +0.24

Average Procurement Unit Cost (APUC) Cost 8871.2 8678.5Quantity 65 65Unit Cost 136.480 133.515 -2.17



Unit Cost History

BY2008 $M TY $MDate PAUC APUC PAUC APUC

Original APB FEB 2009 174.636 136.480 216.747 177.317APB as of January 2006 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/ARevised Original APB N/A N/A N/A N/A N/APrior APB FEB 2009 174.636 136.480 216.747 177.317Current APB JAN 2012 174.636 136.480 216.747 177.317Prior Annual SAR DEC 2011 174.913 137.332 212.604 174.158Current Estimate DEC 2012 175.049 133.515 218.117 175.111

SAR Unit Cost History

Current SAR Baseline to Current Estimate (TY $M)

Initial PAUC Dev Est

Changes PAUC Current Est Econ Qty Sch Eng Est Oth Spt Total

216.747 -2.354 0.000 4.912 0.319 2.410 0.000 -3.917 1.370 218.117



Current SAR Baseline to Current Estimate (TY $M)

Initial APUC Dev Est

Changes APUC Current Est Econ Qty Sch Eng Est Oth Spt Total

177.317 -2.123 0.000 5.291 0.000 -0.638 0.000 -4.735 -2.205 175.111

SAR Baseline History

Item/Event SAR

Planning Estimate (PE)

SAR Development Estimate (DE)

SAR Production

Estimate (PdE)

Current Estimate

Milestone A N/A N/A N/A N/AMilestone B N/A APR 2008 N/A APR 2008Milestone C N/A MAY 2013 N/A NOV 2014IOC N/A DEC 2015 N/A MAY 2017Total Cost (TY $M) N/A 15172.3 N/A 15268.2Total Quantity N/A 70 N/A 70Prog. Acq. Unit Cost (PAUC) N/A 216.747 N/A 218.117



Cost Variance

Summary Then Year $MRDT&E Proc MILCON Total

SAR Baseline (Dev Est) 3223.6 11525.6 423.1 15172.3Previous Changes

Economic -52.3 -391.4 -3.7 -447.4Quantity -- -- -- --Schedule -- +80.5 -- +80.5Engineering -- -- -- --Estimating +16.6 +91.1 -78.9 +28.8Other -- -- -- --Support +33.6 +14.5 -- +48.1

Subtotal -2.1 -205.3 -82.6 -290.0Current Changes

Economic +23.0 +253.4 +6.2 +282.6Quantity -- -- -- --Schedule -- +263.4 -- +263.4Engineering +22.3 -- -- +22.3Estimating +290.2 -132.6 -17.7 +139.9Other -- -- -- --Support -- -322.3 -- -322.3

Subtotal +335.5 +61.9 -11.5 +385.9Total Changes +333.4 -143.4 -94.1 +95.9CE - Cost Variance 3557.0 11382.2 329.0 15268.2CE - Cost & Funding 3557.0 11382.2 329.0 15268.2



Summary Base Year 2008 $MRDT&E Proc MILCON Total

SAR Baseline (Dev Est) 2989.3 8871.2 364.0 12224.5Previous Changes

Economic -- -- -- --Quantity -- -- -- --Schedule -- +36.3 -- +36.3Engineering -- -- -- --Estimating -0.4 +52.2 -66.6 -14.8Other -- -- -- --Support +31.0 -33.1 -- -2.1

Subtotal +30.6 +55.4 -66.6 +19.4Current Changes

Economic -- -- -- --Quantity -- -- -- --Schedule -- +132.4 -- +132.4Engineering +19.2 -- -- +19.2Estimating +253.1 -98.1 -14.7 +140.3Other -- -- -- --Support -- -282.4 -- -282.4

Subtotal +272.3 -248.1 -14.7 +9.5Total Changes +302.9 -192.7 -81.3 +28.9CE - Cost Variance 3292.2 8678.5 282.7 12253.4CE - Cost & Funding 3292.2 8678.5 282.7 12253.4

Previous Estimate: December 2011



RDT&E $M

Current Change ExplanationsBase Year

Then Year

Revised escalation indices. (Economic) N/A +23.0Additional funding for engineering analysis and development of Unmanned Aircraft

System (UAS) Airspace Integration. (Engineering) +19.2 +22.3

Adjustment for current and prior escalation. (Estimating) -15.0 -16.4Revised estimate to reflect application of new escalation indicies. (Estimating) -5.6 -6.4Revised estimate for technology protection, information assurance and encryption

updates. (Estimating) +104.4 +119.6

Revised estimate due to challenges encountered during systems development and subsequent rephasing of funding. (Estimating) +155.7 +177.1

Additional funding required to support Follow On Test and Evaluation. (Estimating) +13.6 +16.3RDT&E Subtotal +272.3 +335.5

Procurement $M


Then Year

Revised escalation indices. (Economic) N/A +253.4Increase due to a one year shift to production from FY 2013 through FY 2026 to FY

2014 through FY 2027. (Schedule) 0.0 +96.8

Additional Schedule Variance related to production line inefficiencies and lost learning due to the one year shift. (Schedule) +132.4 +166.6

Adjustment for current and prior escalation. (Estimating) -0.7 -0.8Revised estimate to reflect application of new escalation indicies. (Estimating) -161.6 -212.8Increase in estimate to incorporate technology refresh. (Estimating) +64.2 +81.0Decrease in Other Support due to a reduction of Interim Contractor Support related to

the production schedule shift and associated manpower allocations. (Support) -255.1 -286.0

Decrease in Initial Spares due to revised estimate associated with the Baseline Assessment Memorandum (BAM) process. (Support) -27.3 -36.3

Procurement Subtotal -248.1 +61.9

MILCON $M


Then Year

Revised escalation indices. (Economic) N/A +6.2Adjustment for current and prior escalation. (Estimating) -1.5 -1.6Revised estimate to reflect application of new escalation indicies. (Estimating) -3.8 -4.6Decrease due to improved estimates and reduced cost of facilities at Ventura County

compared to Beale Air Force Base. (Estimating) -9.4 -11.5

MILCON Subtotal -14.7 -11.5



Contracts

Appropriation: RDT&E Contract Name Triton UAS SDD Contract Contractor Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation Contractor Location Bethpage, NY 11714 Contract Number, Type N00019-08-C-0023, CPAF Award Date April 22, 2008 Definitization Date April 22, 2008

Initial Contract Price ($M) Current Contract Price ($M) Estimated Price At Completion ($M) Target Ceiling Qty Target Ceiling Qty Contractor Program Manager

1164.0 N/A 2 2220.7 N/A 5 2352.1 2406.0

Variance Cost Variance Schedule Variance Cumulative Variances To Date (3/24/2013) -186.1 -49.5 Previous Cumulative Variances -62.5 -58.5 Net Change -123.6 +9.0

Cost And Schedule Variance Explanations The unfavorable net change in the cost variance is due to the increased cost of laboratory system integration and test efforts. The favorable net change in the schedule variance is due to material deliveries to support the flight test program.

Contract Comments The difference between the Initial Contract Price Target and the Current Contract Price Target is due to funding of developmental risk reduction efforts and award of the option for System Demonstration Test Articles. The increase in the contract price during the reporting period was a result of contract scope increases negotiated to satisfy priority requirements.



Deliveries and Expenditures

The above data is current as of 4/30/2013.

Deliveries To Date Plan To Date Actual To Date Total Quantity Percent Delivered

Development 2 2 5 40.00% Production 0 0 65 0.00% Total Program Quantities Delivered 2 2 70 2.86%

Expenditures and Appropriations (TY $M) Total Acquisition Cost 15268.2 Years Appropriated 10 Expenditures To Date 2234.0 Percent Years Appropriated 41.67% Percent Expended 14.63% Appropriated to Date 2918.2 Total Funding Years 24 Percent Appropriated 19.11%



Operating and Support Cost

MQ-4C Triton Assumptions and Ground RulesCost Estimate Reference: The date of the estimate is January 2012, and the source is Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) 4.2 Cost Department. Costs are estimated in FY 2008 dollars, the Base Year (BY) of the estimate. The estimate is based on historical analogous program costs and factors in adjustments that account for known system differences.

Total Operational Aircraft Procured: 68 Primary Authorized Aircraft: 20 Aircraft Attrition Rate: 4 per 100K Flight Hours Total Operational Aircraft Years: 440 Sustainment Strategy: The MQ-4C Triton UAS Product Support Strategy (PSS) focuses on total platform support to ensure compliance with operational requirements and metrics as defined by the Fleet via a Warfighter Performance Based Agreement (WPBA). The Life Cycle Sustainment Strategy is being evaluated by a series of single element Business Case Analyses and studies to identify element support strategies that provide the greatest cost, benefit, performance and risk solutions for each element to comply with Naval Organizational, Intermediate, and Depot Level Maintenance Concepts. The average flight hour utilization per month, per aircraft, is 226. The flight hour utilization per aircraft, per year, is 2,711. The number of aircraft per Main Operating Base (MOB) and Forward Operating Base (FOB) is 4.

Quantity: The total quantity of operational aircraft being procured is 68.

Service Life: The aircraft will be operated and maintained from FY 2016 through FY 2039. Antecedent Information: The MQ-4C Triton UAS is a new capability, and there is no antecedent program.



Unitized O&S Costs BY2008 $M

Cost Element MQ-4C Triton Cost per Air Vehicle per Year

No Antecedent (Antecedent) N/A

Unit-Level Manpower 3.433 0.000Unit Operations 1.843 0.000Maintenance 9.074 0.000Sustaining Support 0.539 0.000Continuing System Improvements 1.163 0.000Indirect Support 1.081 0.000Other 0.000 0.000Total 17.133 --

Unitized Cost Comments: The average annual cost per unit for the MQ-4C Triton UAS is calculated by dividing the Total O&S Cost by the Total Operational Aircraft Years for the program.

Total O&S Cost $M

Current Development APB

Objective/ThresholdCurrent Estimate

MQ-4C Triton MQ-4C Triton No Antecedent (Antecedent)

Base Year 6912.1 7603.3 7538.3 N/AThen Year 10494.5 N/A 11689.3 N/A

Total O&S Costs Comments: None. Disposal Costs Disposal costs are estimated at $3.4M (BY 2008) based on the January 2012 cost estimate.



Documents

Selected Acquisition Report (SAR) · 2017. 5. 19. · As of December 31, 2012 ... Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) data collection and dissemination as well as an airborne communications